This page summarises how we think about component architecture engagements — useful if you are comparing advisory partners or preparing an internal brief.

Primitives versus composites

We separate leaf controls (buttons, inputs, icons) from composites that encode product flows (checkout panels, filter bars). Blurring the boundary creates prop explosion and brittle styling hooks. Engagements start by tagging existing components and agreeing where new UI should land.

Package boundaries

Shared UI should publish through explicit entry points with semver discipline. We document which teams may import internals, how CSS is encapsulated, and where tree-shaking breaks. For monorepos we align with your package manager and CI graph so Storybook builds stay fast.

API surfaces engineers keep

Good component APIs favour narrow props, typed variants, and slots or render props for extension — not boolean forests. We run interface review sessions with your consumers and capture decisions in ADR-style notes tied to the repo.

Verification rhythm

Visual regression, accessibility checks, and bundle-size budgets are wired into the same pipelines that gate application deploys. We help you pick thresholds that match release cadence rather than aspirational dashboards.

Ready to compare your library?

If this mirrors problems you see in your codebase, request a scoping call or read our service formats.